View more on these topics

FOS freezes budget; plays down pension freedoms concerns

Caroline Wayman FOS

The Financial Ombudsman Service is planning to keep its budget flat as is plays down the impact of the new pension freedoms.

It says the reforms, which came into effect in April this year, have “so far resulted in a relatively small number of enquiries and complaints reaching us”.

It adds these mainly relate to delays caused by pension providers or consumers facing difficulties accessing financial advice.

It is forecasting 15,100 new complaints relating to investments and pensions in 2015/16 and budgeting for 15,000 in 2016/17.

In July, Money Marketing revealed details of the first wave of pension freedoms complaints received by the FOS.

Complaints about payment protection insurance will still account for the majority of new enquiries at 170,000 in 2016/17, the FOS predicts.

Its expected budget for 2016/17 will be £223.2m, slightly lower than the £223.9m budgeted for 2015/16.

However, it will ask the FCA to raise the compulsory level it charges authorised firms from £23.3m to £24.5m in 2016/17.

The FOS also proposes freezing the standard case fee at £550 for 2016/27, the fourth year in a row it has been at this level. Each business outside the group-fee arrangement has 25 free cases a year.

Recommended

UK-Currency-Money-Notes-20-GBP-700x450.jpg
2

FOS payout cap hike could hit PI costs

An increase in the Financial Ombudsman Service compensation cap for small businesses could hit advisers’ professional indemnity insurance premiums. In a discussion paper published last month on small businesses, the FCA outlined options for expanding the criteria for FOS complaints. It said as a result the maximum award limit might need to be raised from […]

Global income: preparing for a rate rise…

In the five years since we launched the Artemis Global Income Fund, its manager Jacob de Tusch-Lec has built a distinctive portfolio that is first among its peers. Here he explains why his “quality, cyclical and value yield” stocks, and flexible approach, leave the fund better placed to benefit from uncertainty than funds that depend […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 4 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. At the risk of sounding stupid, what exactly is this compulsory level it charges? If their budget is static, and PPI claims likely to be the main thrust of their work I assume the sector responsible for flogging these will have an increase. The projected claims of life and pensions biz seems to be static or slightly down so how come they want more off us? If these two sectors are to have increased charges, who is going to have the reduction? Someone must if the FoS bill is static and two sectors are being charged more, some sectors of bill payers must be paying less.
    Am I missing something here or am I miles off the mark.
    #confused.com

  2. peter mulholland 8th December 2015 at 1:15 pm

    Maybe they should pay complaints companies for each case – split the case fee

  3. Plays down fears about the pensions freedoms? Yeah, right. Confirm that signed disclaimers of liability from insistent clients will be deemed valid and maybe, just maybe we’ll believe you.

  4. Poor financial management by the people in charge of FOS has now resulted in complaints being handled by inexperienced and under qualified staff. The new model based on advice from PWC (who have charged exorbitant fees no doubt)is running the organisation into the ground.

Leave a comment